CF  THE 
^COLLEGE  0p 

^/CULTU^ 


The  Ohio  State  University  Bulletin 

Volume  XX  January,  1916  Number  17 


EPITHELIOSIS 
INFECTIOSA  AVIUM 


Oscar  Victor  Brumley 

James  Howard  Snook 

College  of  Veterinary  Medicine 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  AT  COLUMBUS 

Entered  as  second-class  matter,  November  17,  1906,  at  the  Postofflce 
at  Columbus,  Ohio,  under  act  of  ConRress.   July   16,   1894 


£^  \ 


' 


EPITHELIOSIS  INFECTIOSA  AVIUM 


CONTAGIOUS      EPITHELIOMA,      CHICKEN      POX, 
DIPHTHERIA,     ROUP,     CANKER 


In  the  fall  of  1910  our  attention  was  called  to  this  disease 
owing  to  the  number  of  birds  that  were  presented  for  treatment 
at  the  hospital.  A  large  Rhode  Island  Red  cockerel,  which 
the  owner  prized  very  highly,  was  brought  in  one  day  with  the 
request  that  everything  possible  be  done  to  restore  it  to  normal 
condition.  On  examination  the  bird  was  found  to  have  a 
marked  nasal  discharge  affecting  both  nostrils,  croupous-diph- 
theritic  membranes  in  the  oral  cavity,  particularly  involving 
the  tongue,  the  throat,  and  at  the  commissures  of  the  mouth. 
The  general  condition  of  the  patient  was  much  disturbed;  de- 
pression, rough  plumage,  loss  of  appetite,  some  elevation  of 
temperature,  etc.  An  autogenic  vaccine  was  made  from  cul- 
tures taken  from  the  lesions  and  used  as  a  curative  agent,  our 
experience  with  other  methods  of  treatment  having  proven 
very  unsatisfactory.  Cultures  were  taken  from  beneath  the 
deposits  and  agar  slopes  inoculated.  The  cultures  were  allowed 
to  grow  (about  36  hours)  until  a  heavy  growth  appeared  on 
the  surface  of  the  agar  and  a  vaccine  made  up  in  the  regular 
manner,  standardized  to  a  No.  7  nepholometer  tube,  and  atten- 
uated by  heating  to  55  deg.  C.  for  one  hour.  One  cubic  centi- 
meter of  this  vaccine  was  injected  subcutaneously.  Marked 
improvement  was  noticeable.  Another  injection  of  the  same 
amount  was  made  in  four  days.  At  this  time  the  croupous  mem- 
branes were  beginning  to  disappear  and  the  nasal  discharge 
was  less  copious  and  the  general  condition  much  improved. 
Complete  recovery  took  place  without  further  incident.  The 
results  of  this  treatment  were  so  satisfactory  that  this  method 
was  tried  on  other  roup  patients  in  the  hospital.  The  results 
were  uniformly  good.  As  a  result  of  these  experiences  a  series 
of  experiments  were  begun,  with  the  object  of  studying  the 
etiology  of  the  disease  and  the  value  of  the  vaccine  as  a  prophy- 
lactic and  curative  agent. 


49^.o 


Name  of  the  Disease 

This  disease,  owing  to  the  variety  of  names  which  have  been 
given  it,  has  been  much  confused  by  a  number  of  writers.  Our 
experiments  and  experience  with  the  disease  prove  quite  con- 
clusively that  the  so-called  roup,  chicken  pox,  diphtheria,  canker 
are  one  and  the  same  disease.  Other  investigators  (Carnwath) 
succeeded  in  producing  diphtheritic  or  croupous  membranes  in 
the  mouth  by  pure  pox  material  and  pox  lesions  from  the  ma- 
terial taken  from  the  diphtheritic  or  croupous  membranes. 
These  results  have  been  substantiated  by  Schmid,  Uhlenhuth, 
Manteufel  and  Ratz. 

Both  forms  of  the  disease  are  very  frequently  observed  in 
the  same  flock  of  birds.  During  the  warm  months  of  the  year 
or  in  warm  climates,  the  prevailing,  form  is  the  pox  lesions  on 
the  comb  and  wattles,  while  in  the  cold  months  or  in  a  north- 
ern climate,  the  croupous  or  diphtheritic  form  predominates. 
Cohabitation  of  birds  shows  that  a  pox-infected  bird  introduced 
into  a  flock  will  produce  either  the  croupous  or  diphtheritic 
form,  or  chicken  pox;  or  vice  versa,  a  fowl  affected  with  the 
croupous  or  diphtheritic  form  will  transmit  the  regular  chicken 
pox.  As  experiment  has  shown  the  various  types  of  the  dis- 
ease are  but  manifestations  of  a  single  clinical  entity,  and 
therefore  the  disease  should  be  designated  by  one  name.  The 
name  proposed  by  the  writers  is  "Infectious  Epitheliosis  of 
Birds." 

Prevalency  and  Distribution  of  the  Disease. 

The  disease  is  found  affecting  nearly  all  birds,  especially 
chickens,  turkeys,  peafowls,  pheasants,  guineas,  pigeons,  spar- 
rows, quail,  etc.  It  is  not  so  frequently  observed  in  ducks, 
geese  and  swans.  The  disease  is  widely  distributed,  appearing 
in  practically  all  countries  where  birds  are  found  in  any  con- 
siderable numbers.  In  the  United  States  the  disease  is  quite 
general,  but  more  prevalent  in  the  northern  states,  especially 
during  the  colder  months.  In  the  fall  when  the  cold,  damp 
weather  begins  outbreaks  occur  quite  generally,  and  poultry- 
men  often  refer  to  the  early  inception  of  the  disease  as  a  cold. 
The  intensity  of  the  disease  usually  increases  until  the  warm 
weather  makes  its  appearance,  when  it  diminishes  and  lies 
dormant,  to  reappear  at  the  first  cool,  damp  weather  in  the 
fall  when  the  birds  are  more  closely  confined. 


Etiology 

Evidence  obtained  by  our  experiments  indicates  that  a  filtra- 
ble  virus  is  the  primary  causative  agent,  and  that  more  or  less 
severe  complicating  conditions  are  induced  by  secondary  infec- 
tion, of  which  a  bacillus,  probably  the  bacillus  diphtheriae  col- 
umbarum  of  Loeffler  seems  to  be  the  most  important. 

Pathogenesis 

Transmission  of  this  disease  is  not  very  difficult.  Usually 
about  70%  of  healthy  birds  will  show  symptoms  of  the  disease 
after  associating  with  an  affected  one  for  a  short  time.  Actual 
contact  is  not  necessary,  as  is  shown  by  the  spread  of  the  dis- 
ease at  poultry  shows.  When  using  an  infecting  bird  with 
mucous  membrane  lesions,  a  few  of  our  experimental  birds 
would  show  cutaneous  lesions,  and  if  a  bird  with  the  cutaneous 
form  was  used  the  mucous  membrane  lesions  were  in  excess. 

Emulsions  of  scrapings  from  either  cutaneous  or  mucous 
membrane  lesions  injected  subcutaneously,  submucously  or  ap- 
plied to  scarified  areas  on  the  skin,  would  in  some  cases  produce 
the  generalized  form  of  the  disease.  Similar  results  were  pro- 
duced by  using  an  emulsion  of  a  24-hour  agar  growth  of  cul- 
tures taken  from  lesions  and  injected  subcutaneously. 

It  is  possible  at  times  by  scarifying  the  mucous  membrane 
of  apparently  healthy  birds  to  produce  at  the  point  of  injury 
local  lesions  not  unlike  those  of  this  disease,  but  they  disappear 
in  a  few  days  without  manifestation  of  general  symptoms.  In- 
complete experiments  by  using  the  blood  of  sick  birds  in  an 
attempt  to  produce  the  disease  gave  negative  results,  which  is 
contrary  to  that  claimed  by  a  few  other  investigators. 

Natural  Infection 

There  are  a  variety  of  ways  by  which  natural  infection  takes 
place.  Cohabitation  is  one  of  the  most  common  methods,  an 
infected  bird  introducing  the  disease  into  an  entire  flock.  The 
exfoliated  membranes,  or  the  exudate  given  off  while  sneezing 
or  coughing,  act  as  intermediary  carriers  to  the  healthy  birds. 
The  infection  in  this  way  will  find  lodgment  on  the  skin  where 
there  are  slight  abrasions,  or  on  the  mucosa  of  the  eyes  or 
mouth,  where  it  develops  either  to  form  the  pox  lesions  or  the 
various  other  forms  found  on  the  mucous  membranes. 


It  is  quite  possible  to  have  the  disease  develop  in  the  eyes 
by  the  infection  gaining  entrance,  and  the  bird  irritating  the 
membranes  by  rubbing  them  against  objects  or  by  scratching 
them  with  their  feet. 

The  disease  is  frequently  spread  by  food  or  drink  which  is 
contaminated  with  infective  material. 

A  very  common  source  of  the  disease  is  the  poultry  show 
where  infected  birds  are  exhibited,  and  conditions  exist  favor- 
able to  reduce  the  bird's  resistance.  It  very  frequently  happens 
that  on  the  return  of  birds  from  the  show  the  disease  develops 
in  the  course  of  a  week  or  ten  days.  Sparrows  and  pigeons  are 
common  carriers  often  transporting  the  infection  great  dis- 
tances. This  is  a  very  important  method  of  transmission 
often  overlooked.  The  disease  has  been  observed  in  sparrows 
in  a  number  of  cases  and  exhibiting  in  them  the  same  charac- 
teristics as  in  other  birds.  Sparrows  and  pigeons  come  in  direct 
contact  with  poultry  at  feeding  time  and  thus  infect  them.  It 
is  sometimes  spread  by  such  intermediary  agents  as  infected 
coops,  clothing,  etc.  Young  birds  are  more  susceptible  to  the 
infection  than  older  ones.  Pigeons  and  chickens  seem  to  be 
far  more  susceptible  than  other  birds. 

It  has  been  observed  that  one  attack  of  the  disease  will  pro- 
duce immunity  for  a  certain  period.  Either  the  skin  form  or 
involvement  of  the  mucous  membranes  confers  equal  immunity 
against  the  opposite  form. 

Pathology 

The  post-mortem  findings  vary  with  the  immediate  cause  of 
death.  In  rare  cases  when  death  is  due  to  suffocation  early  in 
the  disease  only  the  acute  conditions  are  noted.  The  body  ap- 
pears fairly  well  nourished,  the  mucous  membranes  are  covered 
with  a  thick  slimy  mucous  which  may  occlude  the  upper  air 
passages.  In  the  larynx,  or  somewhere  along  the  trachea,  pos- 
sibly in  the  larger  bronchi,  will  be  found  the  mass  of  dense, 
tough,  yellowish  material  obstructing  the  lumen. 

In  some  cases  when  both  eyes  are  involved  death  results 
from  starvation  early  in  the  disease.  The  body  is  emaciated. 
The  mucous  membrane  of  the  eyes,  and  often  of  the  mouth 
and  respiratory  passages  show  inflammation,  and  usually  there 
is  a  mass  of  this  same  yellow  material  in  the  conjunctival  sac 
distorting  or  obscuring  the  eyes.  The  skin  around  the  eyelids 
may  also  be  involved. 

6 


The  majority  of  the  fatal  cases  die  in  two  to  five  weeks. 
In  these  cases  the  body  shows  all  the  symptoms  of  a  toxemia, 
emaciation  is  pronounced  and  the  serous  membranes  show 
petechiae.  In  the  cutaneous  form  the  skin  presents  all  the  symp- 
toms of  a  severe  inflammation,  each  nodule  being  a  distinct 
process.  Some  of  them  show  a  similarity  to  tumor  formation, 
especially  on  the  comb  where  the  skin  is  thickest,  but  on  the 
wattles  and  feathered  skin  around  the  head  this  feature  is  less 
pronounced.  Masses  of  tough  yellow  material  often  distend 
the  suborbital  fossae,  accumulate  in  the  external  ear,  in  the 
lung  substance,  and  along  the  digestive  tract. 

Symptoms 

The  disease  assumes  various  forms,  depending  upon  whether 
it  involves  the  mucous  membranes  of  the  mouth,  the  nasal 
passages,  the  eyes,  the  intestinal  tract,  or  the  skin.  It  is  nec- 
essary from  a  clinical  standpoint  to  consider  these  various 
types  of  the  disease.  It  is  this  fact  which  has  led  to  so  much 
confusion  among  the  poultrymen,  as  they  have  been  inclined 
to  consider  these  forms  separate  diseases. 

In  previous  articles  which  have  been  published  in  the  various 
poultry  journals  by  the  writers,  we  have  tried  to  make  clear 
the  fact  that  the  varied  clinical  manifestations  are  merely 
forms  of  one  disease.  A  number  of  progressive  poultrymen  are 
beginning  to  realize  this,  as  they  frequently  observe  all  the 
different  forms  at  the  same  time  in  the  same  flock. 

Nasal  Passages.  The  early  symptoms  are  similar  to  those 
of  an  acute  nasal  catarrh,  but  the  bird  shows  more  dullness  and 
prostration  and  there  is  present  a  peculiar  offensive  odor  (the 
odor  in  this  disease  is  very  characteristic).  The  discharge  from 
the  nasal  passages  is  at  first  thin,  serous,  and  later  becomes 
thicker  and  glutinous,  causing  the  affected  birds  to  sneeze  and 
shake  their  heads  in  an  effort  to  clear  the  nasal  passages.  The 
secretions  from  the  nasal  passages  collect  around  the  openings 
forming  dirty,   yellowish  crusts. 

The  infraorbital  fossae  become  inflamed  and  distended  with 
pus,  forming  an  enlargement  on  one  or  both  sides  of  the  head 
below  the  eyes.  Owing  to  the  occlusion  of  the  nasal  passages 
the  bird  breathes  with  open  mouth. 

The  Eyes.  At  first  a  thin  serous  secretion  is  observed  flow- 
ing from  one  or  both  eyes;  later  it  becomes  turbid,  thicker,  ad- 
heres to  the  edges  of  the  eyelids  and  dries  to  form  crusts  com- 

7 


pfetefry'closin'gf  the'  eye.'  The  retained  yellow  material  becomes 
thicker  and  often  accumulates  to  such  an  extent  that  it  causes 
a  pronounced  bulging  of  the  eyelids.  Masses  of  this  material 
as  large  as  a  walnut  are  often  removed  from  beneath  the  lids. 
Sometimes  infection  develops  posteriorly  to  the  eyes  in  the 
form  of  abscesses  which  force  the  eyes  partly  out  of  their  posi- 
tion. The  cornea  is  turbid  and  often  ulcerated.  Complete  de- 
struction of  one  or  both  eyes  is  often  observed  in  severe  cases. 

The  Mouth.  Involvement  of  the  mucous  membrane  of  the 
mouth  begins  as  a  local  disturbance.  The  disease  begins  by  a 
slight  redness  or  congestion  of  isolated  areas,  or  may  involve 
the  entire  surface.  In  the  center  of  the  congested  areas  there 
will  appear  in  a  day  or  so,  small  round  or  oval  yellowish  white 
spots,  which  rapidly  spread  and  eventually  form  extensive  col- 
lections of  glutinous  pus,  having  somewhat  the  appearance  of 
diphtheritic  membranes.  The  nature  of  the  collected  material 
on  these  areas  led  to  the  name  "diphtheria"  for  this  form.  As 
the  disease  progresses  this  process  often  extends  over  the 
entire  mucosa  of  the  mouth,  tongue  and  throat.  When  extending 
into  the  larynx,  and  even  into  the  trachea  as  it  does  occasionally, 
there  will  be  marked  symptoms  of  dyspnea.  Asphyxia  is  frequent 
when  the  lesions  extend  to  the  larynx  and  trachea.  On  removal 
of  the  deposits  the  mucosa  presents  a  red,  granulating  surface, 
which  bleeds  easily,  showing  in  some  cases  extensive  sub- 
mucous swelling  and  edema.  The  commissures  of  the  mouth  are 
frequently  involved,  and  in  some  cases  spreads  to  the  skin  and 
contiguous  tissues,  producing  a  characteristic  pox  lesion  on  the 
skin.  Other  complications  are  frequently  found  spreading  from 
the  oral  cavity,  i.  e.,  to  the  pharynx,  esophagus  and  crop,  pro- 
ducing severe  diarrhea  and  other  bowel  disturbances. 

The  Skin.  Lesions  on  the  skin  are  found  in  quite  a  few 
cases,  more  commonly  on  the  comb,  wattles  and  other  portions 
of  the  skin  not  well  protected  by  feathers.  It  is  first  noticed 
as  a  very  fine  gray  vesicle,  which  soon  develops  into  small  eleva- 
tions of  a  reddish  gray  color,  which  later  become  more  grayish 
yellow.  Microscopically  the  nodules  are  composed  of  degen- 
erated epithelial  cells.  These  nodules  in  some  cases  become 
quite  large,  warty  in  appearance,  dry  and  hard.  In  severe  cases 
large  number  of  these  nodules  are  found  distributed  over  the 
skin  on  exposed  surfaces.  On  removing  the  surface  of  the 
nodules  a  raw  granulating  area  is  noted.  Some  cases  show 
distinct  degeneration  of  contiguous  tissues. 

8 


A  mixed  variety  of  the  disease  is  of  frequent  occurrence,  the 
mucosa  showing  the  characteristic  deposits  and  the  skin  pox 
lesions.  It  is  quite  evident  in  these  cases  that  the  disease 
spreads  from  one  location  to  the  other,  and  the  difference  in 
the  lesions  is  due  to  the  difference  in  the  structure  of  the  tissue 
involved. 

General  Symptoms.  In  the  early  stages  before  much  sec- 
ondary infection  takes  place,  there  are  no  marked  general 
symptoms.  Later  marked  general  symptoms  appear.  The 
birds  show  dullness,  assume  a  sitting  posture,  wings  are  held 
pendant,  plumage  becomes  rough  and  the  patients  show  much 
depression.  The  comb  and  wattles  grow  bluish  red  in  color, 
later  pale  and  cold.  In  the  colder  climates  the  disease  often 
assumes  a  subacute  or  chronic  form.  While  in  warmer  cli- 
mates the  acute  form  is  more  often  observed.  Frequently,  how- 
ever, the  disease  assumes  the  character  of  a  chronic  catarrh. 

Diagnosis 

The  disease  usually  makes  its  first  appearance  in  the  fall 
of  the  year  and  often  occurs  as  the  cutaneous  form;  it  may  be 
overlooked,  especially  if  the  birds  are  on  the  range.  The 
mucous  membrane  form  usually  makes  its  appearance  soon 
after  housing  for  the  winter.  The  sneezing,  mouth  breathing, 
occluded  nostrils,  and  an  occasional  inflamed  eye,  are  significant 
especially  when  rapidly  spreading  through  the  flock.  Soon 
after,  a  few  will  refuse  food  and  appear  depressed. 

It  must  also  be  suspected  when  similar  symptoms  appear 
after  adding  new  birds  to  a  healthy  flock  or  returned  birds 
from  shows. 

A  peculiar  characteristic  and  offensive  odor  is  associated 
with  this  disease  and  poultrymen  familiar  with  it  often  recog- 
nize the  disease  from  the  odor  alone.  The  same  odor  is  given 
off  by  cultures. 

Differential   Diagnosis 

Wounds  on  the  skin  around  the  head,  usually  pick  inflicted, 
appear  suspicious,  but  these  heal  rapialy  without  extensive 
thickening.  An  injury  to  the  eye,  even  though  serious,  will  not 
cause  the  formation  of  the  characteristic  yellow  deposit.  Dif- 
ficult respiration,  rarely  seen  in  more  than  one  bird  in  a  flock, 

9 


may  be  due  to  several  causes,  and  those  observed  persisted  for 
some  time  without  affecting  the  general  health  of  the  bird. 

Prognosis 

The  cutaneous  form  usually  runs  a  more  favorable  course, 
apparently  recovering  in  one  to  three  weeks,  when  the  nodules 
become  dry  and  scale  off.  The  mucous  membrane  form  is  less 
favorable,  the  mortality  varying  from  10  to  50%,  depending  on 
the  care  and  sanitary  surroundings. 

Aside  from  the  actual  number  that  die  we  find  there  is  con- 
siderable loss  resulting  from  the  chronic  effects.  After  the 
disappearance  of  all  visible  lesions  the  birds  do  not  seem  to 
regain  their  former  good  condition  for  months.  Egg  production 
is  far  below  normal,  and  young  birds  have  their  growth  checked. 

Treatment 

There  have  been  a  great  many  drugs  recommended  in  the 
treatment  of  this  disease,  and  so  far  none  of  them  have  proven 
very  satisfactory.  Daily  treatment  of  individual  birds  is  a 
tedious  and  laborious  task,  especially  where  large  flocks  are 
affected. 

The  lesions,  whether  on  the  skin  or  in  the  mouth,  should 
be  washed  with  antiseptics,  2%  boric  acid  solution,  Vi-1% 
potassium  permanganate,  or  any  other  equally  efficient  anti- 
septic. The  deposits  should  be  removed  with  a  curette  or  dull 
knife  before  applying  the  antiseptic. 

Vaccination,  which  has  proven  very  satisfactory,  is  done 
in  the  following  manner:  A  vaccine  is  prepared  by  using  a 
bacillus,  probably  the  bacillus  diphtheiiae  columbarum,  which 
seems  to  be  the  most  important,  in  conjunction  with  the  other 
secondary  organisms  present.  This  is  standardized  to  a  No.  7 
nepholometer  tube,  and  1  cc.  of  vaccine  injected  under  the  skin. 
In  some  cases  a  second  injection  is  necessary  in  4-6  days. 

Prophylactic  Treatment 

All  newly  acquired  birds  should  be  examined  and  isolated 
for  at  least  ten  days  before  allowing  them  to  come  in  contact 
with  the  regular  flock. 

As  soon  as  the  disease  is  recognized,  it  is  to  be  recom- 
mended that  all  birds  be  vaccinated   immediately  to  check  it. 

10 


Healthy  flocks  and  those  intended  for  exhibition  purposes  may 
be  vaccinated  to  establish  immunity.  This  has  proven  very 
satisfactory  as  the  appended  report  will  show.  The  immunity 
established  will  last  for  at  least  one  year. 

Bacteriological  Experiments 

A  bacteriological  study  of  epitheliosis  of  birds  was  made 
under  the  direction  of  the  writers  by  Dr.  Israel  Wallman. 
The  experiments  consisted  in  the  following: 

1.  Collecting  cultures  from  the  different  lesions  in  each 
case,  and  isolating  the  organisms  which  were  cultivated  in  pure 
cultures  to  study  their  cultural  characteristics  and  pathoge- 
nicity. 

2.  Experiments  with  the  blood  to  determine  its  virulency. 

3.  Experiments  with  the  filtrate  from  an  emulsion  of 
scrapings  from  mucous  membrane  and  cutaneous  lesions. 

4.  A  study  of  the  pathogenicity  of  each  of  the  different 
organisms  alone,  combined,  and  in  connection  with  the  filtrate. 

5.  Experiments  in  transmitting  the  disease  by  direct  inoc- 
ulations from  the  lesions. 

Seventy-four  cases  of  various  forms  of  the  disease  were 
used  in  these  experiments.  Of  these  54  showed  lesions  on  the 
mucous  membrane  only,  8  cutaneous  lesions,  and  12  had  both 
forms.     Normal  birds  were  used  as  controls. 

Experiment  No.   1 

The  following  organisms  were  found  fairly  constant  in  sick 
birds,  while  in  healthy  birds  the  same  organisms  were  constant 
with  the  exception  of  No.  1  described  below. 

Organism    No.    1.      (Probably    the   bacillus    diphtheriae 
columbarum  of  Loeffler).  A  short,  thick,  highly  motile 
bacillus  taking  a  bipolar  stain.    Gram  negative. 
Broth:  slight  deposit  and  scum. 
Dextrose-broth:  acid,  no  gas  production. 
Sucrose:  same. 

Lactose:  no  acid,  no  gas  production. 
Milk  digested  without  acid  production,  gelatin  and  blood 

serum  digested. 
Does  not  produce  indol  nor  reduce  nitrates. 
On  agar  abundant  growth,  edge  leaf-like. 

11 


Agglutination. 

Normal  blood  serum  agglutinates  it  in  dilutions  of  1-5. 
Serum  from  sick  birds  agglutinates  it  completely  in  dilu- 
tions of  1-20  and  partially  in  dilutions  of  1-60. 

Complement  fixation  test. 

Using  an  extract  of  this  organism  as  an  antigen  did  not 

produce  fixation  of  the  complement. 

Antigen  was  prepared  as  follows:  Organism  was 
grown  on  agar  and  emulsion  made  in  .85%  NcCl  solu- 
tion heated  for  one  hour  at  60°  C.  and  shaken  for  36 
hours  at  480  strokes  per  minute.  A  1-20  dilution  of  the 
extract  of  the  organism  did  not  prevent  hemolysis.  A 
1-40  dilution  of  the  antigen  and  positive  serum  in 
amounts  varying  from  .03  cc.  to  .5  cc.  was  used  for  the 
test. 

Pathogenicity:     Healthy  young    chickens  were  inoculated  as 
follows : 

(1)  Two  inoculated  subcutaneously  on  the  comb. 

(2)  Two  inoculated  submucously  in  the  oral  cavity. 

(3)  Two  inoculated  intravenously. 

(4)  Two  inoculated  intraperitoneally. 

(5)  Two  inoculated  by  scarifying  the  wattles. 

In  birds  Nos.  2  and  5.  local  lesions  appeared  on  the  second 
day,  lasting  an  average  of  five  days,  and  resulting  in  complete 
recovery  without  producing  the  typical  diseases,  i.  e.,  there 
were  no  general  symptoms. 

Organism  No.  2.     A  small  motile  bacillus  resembling  a 
diplococcus. 

Stains  by  all  ordinary  stains,  gram  negative. 

Broth:  grows  in  small  chains. 

Agar:  moist,  transparent  grayish  growth. 

Blood  serum:  not  digested. 

Gelatin:  liquifies  slightly. 

Potatoes:   grayish  growth. 

Milk:  coagulates  with  acid  production. 

Sucrose-broth:  acid  and  gas  production. 

Dextrose-broth:  acid  and  no  gas. 

Lactose:  acid  (slight)  and  no  gas. 

Negative  results  on  agglutination  and  complement  fixa- 
tion test 

12 


Pathogenicity:  A  test  made  as  with  Organism  No.  1  resulting 
in  slight  swelling  at  point  of  injection  in  mucous  membrane  and 
skin  lasting  for  a  few  days  without  producing  the  disease. 

Organism     No.     3.    A  small    non-motile     cocco-bacillus. 

Gram  positive. 
Gelatin  and  blood  serum:  not  digested. 
No  action  on  normal  or  litmus  milk. 
Dextrose  and  sucrose  broth:  acid  and  no  gas. 
Lactose:  no  change. 
Does  not  produce  agglutination  or  complement  fixation. 

Pathogenicity:     Does  not  produce  the  disease. 

Organism  No.  4.    A  large  motile  square-ended  bacillus 

resembling  B.  agiles.     Gram  negative. 
Broth:  membranous  scum. 
Gelatin:  arborescent  growth  and  digestion. 
Agar:  abundant,  spreading  moist  growth. 
Milk:  coagulated  and  digested  with  slight  acid  production. 
Blood  serum:  not  digested. 
Sugar-broth:  no  change. 

Pathogenicity:  produces  lesions  but  no  general  symptoms. 
Organism  No.  5.     Pseudomonas  pyocyanea. 

Pathogenicity:  Swelling  and  inflammation  at  point  of  injec- 
tion. Intravenous  injection  resulted  in  septicemia  recovering 
the  organism  from  heart,  kidneys,  etc. 

Organism  No.  6.     A  small  slender,  highly  motile  bacillus. 

Gram  negative. 
Produces    a    brick-red  growth  on  agar,  potato,    gelatin 

and  blood  serum. 
No  coagulation  or  acid  in  milk. 
No  change  in  sugar  broth. 
Not  pathogenic. 

Organism     No.    7.     A  small     non-motile    cocco-bacillus. 

Gram  negative. 
Gelatin  and  blood  serum:  not  digested. 
Milk:  no  acid  or  coagulation. 
Sugar-broth:  no  change. 
Does  not  form  indol  nor  reduce  nitrates. 

13 


No    special    characteristics    as    to    cultural    growth    and 
pathogenicity. 

Organism  No.  8.     B.  necrophorous. 

Organism  No.  9.     A  colon-like  organism.   Gram  negative. 

Gelatin  and  blood  serum:  not  digested. 

Milk:  coagulated. 

Acid  in  litmus  milk. 

Lactose  broth:  acid  and  gas. 

Sucrose-broth:  acid  and  gas. 

Dextrose  broth:  acid  and  no  gas. 

No   indol.     Nitrates   were   reduced   to  nitrites    and   am- 
monia. 

Organism  No.  10.     Staphylococcus  albus. 

Organism  No.  11.     Staphylococcus  aureus. 

Organism  No.  12.     Micrococcus  citreus. 

Organism  No.  13.     Sarcina  tetragina. 
From  the  description  of  the  pathogenicity  of  the  different 
organisms  it  is  seen  that  none  were  capable  of  producing  the 
typical  disease  symptoms.    On  injecting  an  emulsion  of  all  the 
different  organisms  more  extensive  lesions  were  produced. 

Experiment  No.  2 

a.  The  blood  of  a  series  of  sick  birds  was  examined  by 
means  of  a  dark-field  illuminating  apparatus  and  no 
organism  was  noted. 

b.  Inoculations  from  the  heart,  blood  and  liver  substance 
showed  no  growth. 

c.  A  series  of  birds  were  injected  subcutaneously,  submu- 
cously,  intravenously  and  the  wattles  scarified  with 
amounts  varying  from  .2  to  1  cc.  of  blood  serum  from 
sick  birds. 

The  disease  was  not  produced. 

Experiment  No.   3 

Four  birds  with  all  the  clinical  symptoms  of  the  disease 
were  killed  and  an  emulsion  of  the  heads  of  these  birds,  passed 
through  a  Berkefeld  filter,  were  used  for  this  experiment.  Each 
head  was  macerated  and  triturated  separately  with  sterile  sand 
and  sterile  physiological  salt  solution.  The  emulsion  of  each 
head  was  separately  filtered  through  a  Berkefeld  filter.  The 
filtrates  were  tested  out  on  culture  media  and  no  growth  was 

14 


present.  Six  birds  were  inoculated  with  each  nitrate.  Two  of 
them  subcutaneously,  two  submucously  and  two  intraperito- 
neally.  Four  birds  were  used  for  the  four  different  nitrates. 
Daily  records  were  taken  as  to  the  temperatures,  appetite  and 
other  clinical  symptoms.  The  birds  remained  normal  until  the 
12th  day  and  from  the  12th  to  the  20th  day  all  of  them  became 
sick.  All  showed  an  elevation  of  temperature  of  two  degrees 
or  more,  dullness  and  loss  of  appetite.  Eleven  had  nasal  dis- 
charge, eye  lesions  and  saliva  of  a  thick  consistency.  Seven 
had  yellow  caseous  deposits  in  the  mouth.  Of  these,  three  died 
in  a  few  days  and  inoculations  on  media  from  the  heart  and 
liver  showed  no  growth.  Six  birds  showed  general  symptoms 
of  roup  but  no  local  lesions. 

Experiment  No.  4 

To  determine  the  action  of  organisms  on  the  remaining  six 
birds  whose  resistance  had  been  reduced  by  the  nitrate  injection. 
These  birds  were  injected  as  follows: 

One  submucously  with  organism  No.  1. 
One  submucously  with  organism  No.  2. 
One  submucously  with  organism  No.  3. 
One  submucously  with  staphylococci  albi. 
Two  submucously  with  a  mixture  of  the  four  organisms 
mentioned. 
In  all  cases  typical  lesions  of  the  disease  appeared  at  the 
point  of  injection. 

Experiment  No.  5 

Experiment  to  transmit  the  disease  by  inoculating  the 
mouth  deposits  of  sick  birds  into  healthy  ones. 

Six  birds  were  inoculated  submucously  with  scrapings  from 
these  lesions  and  on  the  third  day  pustules  appeared  at  the 
point  of  injection.  On  the  fifth  day  a  yellowish  membrane  ap- 
peared. Lesions  disappeared  on  the  tenth  day  and  typical 
symptoms  of  the  disease  were  not  produced. 


15 


Results  of  Vaccine  Treatment 

The  majority  of  the  birds  treated  were  owned  by  people  in 
the  immediate  neighborhood  of  Columbus.  They  would  in- 
variably send  to  the  hospital  to  be  treated  a  few  of  the  most 
severe  cases  and  as  the  results  were  satisfactory  permission 
was  obtained  to  treat  the  entire  flocks.  The  birds  (severe 
cases)  treated  at  the  hospital  were  given  extra  attention  (local 
surgical  and  antiseptic  treatment),  while  those  treated  on  the 
owners'  premises  received  only  the  usual  care  from  the  owner 
following  the  treatment.  With  one  exception  all  flocks  were 
given  but  one  treatment,  a  few  birds  with  severe  cases,  amount- 
ing to  approximately  .5%,  were  sent  to  the  hospital  for  a  fur- 
ther treatment.  The  exact  mortality  rate  can  not  be  given,  ex- 
cept in  the  University  flock,  as  the  owner  would  state  satisfac- 
tory results  even  if  a  few  of  the  most  severe  cases  had  died. 

This  list  shows  a  complete  record  as  taken  from  our  Clinic 
book  of  all  cases  treated  from  1910  to  1916,  a  period  of  six 
years. 

1910-1911 

Five  cases  treated  at  the  clinic.    These  were  the  first  cases 
given  vaccine  treatment. 
Results:  Three  recovered. 

1911-1912 

Flock  No.  1,  168  birds;  owner,  Mr.  M.  Joyce,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Results:  Owner  reported  rapid  improvement  and  stated:  "It 
improves  their  appetite." 

Flock  No.  2,  69  birds;  owner,  Mr.  C.  F.  Frazey,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 

Results:  Good.  A  few  required  second  treatment.  Appar- 
ently healthy  in  three  weeks  after  being  treated. 

Flock  No.  3,  75  birds;  owner,  Mr.  W.  F.  Sherman. 

Results:  These  birds  had  been  "out  of  condition"  for  some 
time  and  not  laying.  Only  a  few  cases  showed  lesions.  They 
showed  rapid  improvement  and  as  many  as  ususal  were  laying 
in  January,  five  weeks  after  treatment.  A  neighbor's  flock  in  a 
similar  condition  not  treated  remained  in  bad  condition  and 
were  destroyed  later  in  the  winter. 

Flock  No.  4,  51  birds;  owner,  Mr.  F.  Hendershott,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio.  Condition  similar  to  No.  3. 

Results:    Same.    Three  birds  died  soon  after  treatment. 

16 


Flock  No.  5.,  79  birds;  owner,  Mr.  Chas.  Aubert,  Columbus, 
Ohio.     Several  showed  acute  symptoms. 

Results:    Very  good.    A  few  were  given  a  second  treatment. 

Flock  No.  6,  90  birds;  owner,  Mr.  W.  E.  Bovey,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 

Results:     Owner   reported  complete  recovery  and  return  to 

laying. 

Flock  No.  7,  18  birds;  owned  by  Ohio  State  University,  Co- 
lumbus. 

Results:  Only  advanced  cases  were  treated.  Three  deaths 
reported. 

Flock  No.  8,  11  birds;  owner,  Mr.  Frank  Shank,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 

Results:     Owner  stated  condition  of  birds  very  good. 

Flock  No.  9,  13  birds;  owner,  Mr.  C.  F.  Frazey,  Columbus. 

Results:  Owner  was  so  well  pleased  with  results  of  flock 
No.  2  that  he  had  these  treated  with  the  same  good  results.  No 
appearance  of  the  disease  during  the  winter. 

Clinic  cases:  Eighteen  birds  brought  to  the  clinic  during  the 
year  1911-1912  showing  acute  symptoms.    Four  of  these  died. 

1912-1913 

Flock  No.  1,  45  birds;  owner,  Mr.  J.  C.  Sullivan,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 

Results:     Satisfactory. 

Flock  No.  2,  10  birds;  owner,  State  School  for  Deaf  and 
Dumb,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Results.     Good.     All  recovered. 

Flock  No.  3,  11  birds;  owner,  Mr.  C.  W.  Kigle,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 

Results:     Very  good. 

Flock  No.  4,  90  birds;  owner,  Mr.  M.  D.  Steinhauser,  Co- 
lumbus, Ohio. 

Results:     "More  than  pleased,"  owner  stated. 

Flock  No.  5,  457  birds;  owner,  Ohio  State  University,  Co- 
lumbus. 

Results:  Very  good.  A  few  were  given  a  second  treatment 
and  five  died  from  the  disease  during  the  winter. 

17 


Flock  No.  6,  101  birds;  owner,  same  as  No.  5,  1911-1912. 

Results:  A  few  birds  showed  early  symptoms  and  the  entire 
flock  was  treated.    The  disease  disappeared  entirely. 

Flock  No.  7,  71  birds;  owner,  Mr.  Minnick,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Results:  A  few  birds  showed  lesions  following  their  return 
from  the  poultry  show.  Disappearance  of  disease  in  three 
weeks  after  treatment. 

Flock  No.  8,  34  birds;  owner,  Mrs.  Roper,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Results:     Very  good. 

Flock  No.  9,  46  birds;  same  as  No.  2  this  year. 

Results:  Complete  recovery  of  the  ten  birds  of  No.  2  flock 
treated  earlier  induced  the  superintendent  of  the  school  to  have 
these  treated.     Good  results  were  obtained. 

Flock  No.  10,  31  birds;  owner,  Mrs.  Stevens,  Columbus,  Ohio. 
Results:     Good. 

Clinic  cases:  56  birds  were  presented  at  the  Clinic  by  19 
different  owners.  A  few  were  sent  in  from  flocks  treated  to  be 
given  a  second  treatment.  Six  of  the  56  died  and  the  others 
were  discharged  in  good  condition. 

1913-1914 

Flock  No.  1,  120  birds;  owner,  Dr.  Richardson,  Huntsville, 
Ohio. 

Results:      Owner's    statement,    "highly    satisfactory." 

Flock  No.  2,  14  birds;  owner,  Mr.  E.  J.  Griffith,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:     Satisfactory. 

Flock  No.  3,  12  birds;  owner,  Mr.  J.  H.  McCoy,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 

Results:     Owner  well  pleased. 

Flock  No.  4,  36  birds;  owned  by  Ohio  State  University,  Co- 
lumbus. 

Results:  The  disease  made  its  appearance  in  one  pen  and 
was  treated,  checking  the  disease  with  a  loss  of  three  birds. 

Flock  No.  5,  63  birds;  owned  by  State  School  for  Deaf  and 
Dumb,  Columbus. 

Results:  Superintendent  had  flock  treated  to  immunize 
them,  influenced  by  the  good  results  of  previous  years. 

18 


Flock  No.  6,  112  birds;  owned  by  Ohio  State  University,  Co- 
lumbus. 

Results:  Treated  as  prophylactic  measure  following  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  disease  in  flock  No.  4  of  this  year.  No  cases 
developed  during  the  remainder  of  the  year. 

Flock  No.  7,  40  birds;  owner,  Newton  McClurg,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:     Very  good. 

Flock  No.  8,  25  birds;  owner,  Mr.  P.  C.  Dierdorf,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results :    Satisfactory. 

Flock  No.  9,  48  birds;  owner,  Mrs.  H.  S.  McBee,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Satisfactory.  Stating  that  her  "valuable  An- 
conas  were  saved"  by  this  treatment. 

Flock  No.  10,  78  birds;  owner,  Mr.  H.  Kemp,  Columbus,  Ohio. 
Results:    Satisfactory. 

Flock  No.  11,  53  birds;  owner,  Mr.  J.  H.  Greer,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Checked  the  outbreak.  A  few  cases  were  brought 
to  the  clinic  for  further  treatment. 

Flock  No.  12,  55  birds;  owner,  Mr.  A.  W.  Bixby,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 

Results:     Good. 

Flock  No.  13,  40  birds;  owner,  Mr.  W.  A.  Dumond,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Very  good.  Owner  asked  that  arrangements  be 
made  to  immunize  them  each  year. 

Clinic  cases:  96  birds  were  presented  to  the  Clinic  for  treat- 
ment; 32  of  these  had  received  treatment  in  the  above  flocks, 
but  a  second  injection  was  thought  necessary.  Of  the  96  ad- 
vanced cases  treated  16  of  them  died  and  the  others  were  dis- 
charged in  good  condition. 

1914-1915 

Flock  No.  1,  60  birds;  owned  by  the  Ohio  Experiment  Sta- 
tion, Wooster,  0. 

Results:     Very  much  pleased  with  the  treatment. 

Flock  No.  2,  20  birds;  owner,  Glenella  Poultry  Farm,  Lin- 
den, Ohio. 

19 


.'    '  %  •    *  '  *        .   - 


Results:    These  were  all  advanced  cases  from  a  large  flock. 
Three  died. 

Flock  No.  3,  504  birds;  owner . 


Results:  Unfavorable;  60%  of  the  healthy  birds  contracted 
the  disease  about  15  days  after  being  treated.  Examination  of 
the  vaccine  showed  it  had  not  been  attenuated  sufficiently. 

Flock  No.  4,  86  birds;  owner,  Mr.  Charles  Aubert,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Owner  stated  that  it  "improved  the  appetite  and 
general  condition  of  the  entire  flock." 

Flock  No.  5,  66  birds;  owner,  Mr.  J.  H.  Greer,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Some  of  these  showed  severe  acute  cases,  the  ma- 
jority of  them  improved  rapidly  (see  flock  No.  7). 

Flock  No.  6,  39  birds;  owner,  Mr.  C.  L.  Carlisle,  Columbus, 
Ohio. 
Results:     Very  satisfactory. 

Flock  No.  7,  15  birds;  owner,  Mr.  J.  H.  Greer,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  These  were  the  most  severe  cases  of  flock  No.  5 
and  were  given  another  treatment. 

Flock  No.  8,  316  birds;  owned  by  the  Ohio  State  University, 
Columbus. 

Results:  The  entire  flock  was  treated.  Some  of  the  birds 
showed  symptoms  of  the  disease  and  a  few  of  these  were  given 
second  treatment  (see  flock  No.  14). 

Flock  No.  9,  55  birds;  owner,  Mr.  M.  L.  Myers,  Marys- 
ville,  Ohio. 

Results:  Good.  Mr.  Myers  obtained  the  vaccine  and  admin- 
istered it  himself  with  good  results  and  felt  justified  in  contin- 
uing its  use. 

Flock  No.  10,  18  birds;  owner,  Glenella  Poultry  Farm,  Lin- 
den, Ohio. 

Results:  Good.  These  birds  represent  new  cases  develop- 
ing since  treatment  of  flock  No.  2. 

Flock  No.  11,  39  birds;  owner,  Mr.  Scothorn,  Columbus,  0. 
Results:    As  no  report  was  received  the  results  were  consid- 
ered satisfactory. 

20 


Flock  No.  12,  71  birds;  owner,  Dr.  E.  G.  Horton,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Good.  A  few  cases  developing  a  few  weeks  later 
were  brought  to  the  hospital  for  further  treatment. 

Flock  No.  13,  137  birds;  owner,  Mr.  W.  H.  George,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Well  satisfied  with  the  treatment. 

Flock  No.  14,  20  birds;  owned  by  the  Ohio  State  University, 
Columbus. 

Results:  These  were  given  second  treatment  (see  flock  No. 
8).     Three  died. 

Flock  No.  15,  13  birds;  owner,  Glenella  Poultry  Farm,  Lin- 
den, Ohio. 

Results:  These  were  new  cases  developing  after  treatment 
of  flock  No.  10.     Owner  reports  good  results. 

Flock  No.  16,  20  birds;  owner,  Mr.  J.  M.  Blue,  Columbus,  O. 

Results :     Satisfactory. 

Clinic  cases:  48  advanced  cases  were  presented  to  the  Clinic 
for  treatment  and  of  these  but  4  died. 

1915-1916 

Flock  No.  1,  43  birds;  owner,  Carrie  Kissel,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Results :     Good. 

Flock  No.  2,  49  birds;  owner  Mr.  J.  H.  Greer,  Columbus,  0. 

Results:  Severe  outbreak.  Seven  brought  to  the  hospital  for 
further  treatment.    Three  of  these  died. 

Flock  No.  3,  24  birds;  owner,  Mr.  Charles  Dozer,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Disease  was  checked  in  the  flock,  and  one  bird 
brought  to  the  hospital  for  further  treatment.    Death  resulted. 

Flock  No.  4,  160  birds;  owner,  Gensemer  Bros.,  Creston,  Ohio. 

Results:     No  report  received  as  yet. 

Flock  No.  5,  1,053  birds;  owner,  Glenella  Poultry  Farm,  Lin- 
den, Ohio. 

Results:  Owing  to  the  unsatisfactory  method  of  treating 
only  the  sick  birds  as  done  last  year,  the  owner  decided  to  have 
the  entire  flock  vaccinated.  About  75  birds  showed  symptoms 
of  the  disease  at  the  time  of  treatment  and  26  of  these  were 
brought  to  the  hospital  for  further  treatment. 

21 


Flock  No.  6,  62  birds;  owner,  Mr.  M.  L.  Myers,  Marysville,  O. 

Results:  "You  ask  my  experience  in  regard  to  the  use  Of 
the  vaccine.  I  will  say  that  thus  far,  and  I  have  used  it 
for  four  or  five  years,  that  at  this  season  of  the  year  I 
would  not  be  without  it.  It  has  made  the  breeding  of 
fancy  birds  a  pleasure  to  me,  for  before  its  use,  as  a  rule, 
I  would  lose  at  this  season  of  the  year  several  of  my  best 
young  birds,  but  I  have  lost  none  since,  and  I  have  tried 
it  on  some  very  bad  cases. 

"Before  the  use  of  the  vaccine,  the  trouble  that  I 
would  have  was  with  the  young  birds  that  had  farm  or 
free  range.  While  at  large  they  appeared  to  be  in  fine 
condition,  but  as  soon  as  confined  a  few  days  in  winter 
quarters,  then  my  trouble  began,  colds,  roup,  etc.,  which 
would  affect  the  whole  flock.  Two  years  ago  I  treated 
every  bird  the  day  it  was  put  into  winter  quarters,  and 
I  had  but  one  sick  bird.  Last  fall  as  I  housed  my  birds 
I  treated  only  the  best  ones,  and  the  culls  of  the  flock  put 
in  other  quarters.  I  had  no  trouble  with  birds  treated, 
but  did  with  the  others. 

"Last  winter  and  the  winter  before  I  treated  my  ex- 
hibition birds,  and  not  one  of  them  at  the  end  of  the  sea- 
son had  a  cold  or  a  sign  of  roup,  while  in  previous  years 
I  lost  the  use  of  some  of  my  best  birds  for  mating,  owing 
to  colds  and  roup  contracted  in  the  show  room." 

Flock  No.  7,  54  birds;  owner,  Mr.  J.  H.  Greer,  Columbus,  0. 
Results:  Second  treatment  was  given  (see  flock  No.  2),  as  a 
few  chronic  cases  remained. 

Flock  No.  8,  29  birds;  owner,  Mrs.  A.  E.  Reese,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:     No  report. 

Flock  No.  9,  21  birds;  owner,  Mr.  F.  Wilson,  Columbus,  Ohio. 
Results:    Owner  reports  birds  in  fine  condition.    Three  acute 
cases  were  found  at  time  of  treatment. 

Flock  No.  10,  462  birds;  owned  by  the  Ohio  State  University, 
Columbus. 

Results:  Superintendent  reports  one  death.  Others  in  good 
condition.  Three  cases  were  noticed  at  the  time  they  were 
treated. 

22 


Flock  No.  11,  48  birds;  owner,  Mr.  C.  L.  Carlisle,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:  Good  results  following  treatment  last  year  in- 
duced the  owner  to  have  them  immunized. 

Flock  No.  12,  23  birds;  owner,  Mr.  C.  H.  Davles  Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Results:     No  report. 

Flock  No.  13,  162  birds;  owner  State  School  for  Deaf  and 
Dumb,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Results:     Too  recent  for  report. 

Clinic  cases:  Up  to  January  first  of  this  year  52  birds  in  ad- 
vanced stages  of  the  disease  were  presented  at  the  Clinic;  seven 
of  these  died. 

During  the  past  six  years  (1910-16)  vaccine  was  sent  to  the 
owners  of  approximately  12,000  birds,  living  in  different  parts 
of  the  United  States  and  Canada.  No  accurate  reports  have 
been  received  from  the  majority  of  owners  but  inasmuch  as 
they  have  applied  for  more  of  the  vaccine  we  assume  that  the 
results  were  equally  as  satisfactory  as  with  those  in  the  above 
experiments. 

It  has  not  been  used  extensively  in  treating  turkeys,  but 
from  the  reports  received  from  the  owners  of  the  three  or  four 
flocks  of  turkeys  treated  the  results  were  equally  as  good  as  for 
chickens. 

The  total  number  of  cases  treated  during  the  past  six  years 
in  and  near  Columbus: 

1910 5 

19H .'  592 

1912 952 

1913 792 

1914 .!.  1,573 

*1915 2,242 

Grand  total 6,156 

Mortality  rate  in  flocks  treated  less  than  1  per  cent. 
Mortality  rate  in  flocks  not  treated  from  10-50  per  cent. 

♦Report  only  to  January  1,  1916. 

23 


Summary  and  Conclusions. 

1.  From  the  bacteriological  experiments  we  have  made  and 
the  good  results  obtained  from  vaccination,  we  are  of  the 
opinion  that  we  have  been  dealing  with  one  disease  only.  Owing 
to  the  confusion  in  names  which  have  been  used  to  designate 
this  disease,  we  have  concluded  to  give  it  a  new  name — Infec- 
tious epitheliosis  of  birds  (Epitheliosis  infectiosa  avium).  This 
indicates  involvement  of  the  epithelium  both  of  the  skin  and 
mucous  membranes.  It  was  thought  that  inasmuch  as  we  find 
so  many  variable  forms  of  the  disease  that  this  name  would 
be  more  appropriate  than  any  combination  of  names  so  far  sug- 
gested. 

2.  Our  work  extending  over  a  period  of  six  years  convinces 
us  that  typical  infectious  epitheliosis  is  due  to  a  combination 
of  two  factors:  (a)  A  filterable  virus;  (b)  secondary  invading 
organisms  which  vary  in  kind  but  of  which  the  so-called  "Bacil- 
lus diphtheriae  columbarum"  of  Loeffler,  appears  to  be  the 
most  important. 

3.  The  filterable  virus  is  the  necessary  primary  invader 
which  lowers  the  bird's  resistance  and  thus  prepares  the  tissues 
for  the  invasion  by  the  secondary  organisms.  Neither  factor 
alone  will  cause  the  typical  disease. 

4.  The  excellent  results  derived  from  the  use  of  a  vaccine 
made  from  the  secondary  organisms,  both  in  prevention  and 
treatment,  are  due  to  controlling  the  secondary  infections  which 
cause  the  serious  complications.  If  these  are  controlled  infec- 
tion due  to  the  primary  virus  is  mild  and  soon  disappears. 
(There  is  a  remote  possibility  that  the  filterable  virus  is  con- 
tained in  the  vaccine.  We  have  no  evidence  that  this  is  or  is 
not  the  case.  The  presence  of  the  virus  in  the  vaccine  would 
indicate  its  growth  with  the  other  organisms  on  the  cultures. 
This  would  be  contrary  to  our  present  knowledge  of  filterable 
viruses.    This  point  will  be  investigated.) 

5.  The  therapeutic  dose,  as  indicated  by  the  large  number 
of  birds  treated,  is  1  cc.  for  the  average  adult  bird.  Younger 
and  smaller  birds  receive  a  lesser  amount. 

6.  The  immunizing  dose  found  most  satisfactory  is  1  cc. 

7.  No  bad  results  have  followed  when  larger  doses  have 
been  administered. 

8.  Reports  received  to  date  indicate  that  vaccination  is 
equally  efficacious  in  the  treatment  of  infectious  epitheliosis  in 
turkeys. 

24 


&■■■ 


The  Ohio  State  University  Bulletin  is  published  at 
least  twenty  times  during  the  year  as  follows:  Monthly 
in  June,  July,  August,  and  September,  and  bi-weekly 
in  October,  November,  December,  January,  February, 
March,  April,  and  May. 


4927.; . 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


